Delusional Altruism. Kris Putnam-Walkerly

2 You Are Fearful

      I recently spoke to the CEO of a foundation association who wanted to refresh the association's strategic plan. He wanted to start with a “learning tour,” on which staff and board members would travel to multiple cities, set up town hall meetings in each, invite funders to attend, and engage in an orchestrated conversation to “learn” in order to inform the strategic plan. I told him he suffered from a scarcity mentality and was wasting time and resources. As you can imagine, he was shocked.

      I explained that between his many talented staff, his seasoned board members who represented their entire geographic footprint, research they recently commissioned, and his team's collective learning from attending conferences and talking with members, they already knew 80% of what they needed to know. There were much faster and cheaper ways to gain that missing 20% than spending six months on a “learning tour.”

The leadership of this organization suffered from a scarcity mentality because of fear. They didn't trust their own talent. They lacked confidence that they already had most of the knowledge they needed, or that they could quickly gain the rest. They didn't regularly invest time in their own organizational learning to capture and use this knowledge. As a result, they were willing to spend a lot of time and money on the wrong things (the learning tour)—and were willing to hurt themselves by postponing strategy development as a result. They were delusional in their altruism. They thought they were doing the right thing, but they were just getting in their own way.

      Fear manifests itself in myriad ways in philanthropy. And it causes loads of problems. Fear wastes money, time, and talent. It prevents you from learning and improving. It results in less impact. And it's no fun! Who wants to be fearful?

      Let's talk about some of the most common ways we experience fear in philanthropy. As you read these examples, think about the many ways fear holds funders back and how this contributes to a scarcity mentality. It might result in funders giving less, investing less in their own growth and development, or not openly sharing what they are doing and learning.

Fear of “Coming Out” in Support of a Cause

      Many funders fear taking a stand on an issue. They worry that there could be negative repercussions to their reputation. They worry people might no longer fund them, hire them, or like them. This happens frequently with community foundations.

      Community foundations are grantmaking public charities that raise money from donors in their community and make grants to nonprofits in that same community. Because they serve the entire community, they often feel compelled to meet everyone's needs. For example, they feel they need to support all issues—from healthcare to the arts to education—and appeal to all donors. As a result, they fear that if they take a leadership role on a particular issue, such as racial equity or education reform, they might alienate some of those donors.

Similarly, celebrities fear “coming out” in support of specific causes because it might alienate fans, cause a backlash, and result in fewer starring roles. In today's polarized world, electrified by social media, this fear is not unwarranted. Actor Tom Selleck learned this when he posed for a print advertisement for the National Rifle Association (NRA). The ad depicted him with a rifle over his shoulder accompanied by the slogan “Shooting teaches young people good things.” It came out a month following the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado, where two high school students murdered 13 people and injured 21 students.¹ The unfortunate timing of the ad resulted in a public backlash, starting with a challenging televised appearance on The Rosie O'Donnell Show where, instead of plugging his new film The Love Letter as he had planned, Selleck ended up debating gun control with host O'Donnell for more than seven minutes.

      Often families fear they will be deluged by funding requests if they publicly announce the launch of a new foundation or new funding priorities. And in many parts of the world, such as the Netherlands, there is a strong cultural belief that talking about one's philanthropic giving is a form of bragging.

      As a result of fear of coming out in support of a cause, or even talking about their charitable giving, many philanthropists inadvertently embrace a scarcity mentality. They hold themselves back. They refrain from fulfilling their philanthropic passion. They give anonymously. Or they don't give at all.

Fear of Being Out and About

      Philanthropists also fear exposure. Not exposure that they have done something illicit or unethical—I mean fear of being seen. Fear of being out and about in their community. Fear that others will have access to them. As a result, they stay inside their bubble. They withhold themselves. In the process they suppress their own learning, and they make life harder for the those they want to help.

I understand why this is a real concern for celebrities. You might want to attend your favorite charity's gala, meet with parents to understand opportunities to improve local schools, or just go for a walk in Central Park. But you can't because you will be overwhelmed by fans and photographers. Or you could be someone with a fear of wide open spaces, crowds, or strangers. Attending the charity gala might truly be horrifying!

      But chances are, you don't suffer from fears like these and you're not George Clooney.

      Yet, like many philanthropists, you might maintain an arms-length relationship with your grantees and communities. Many donors hide behind family offices, wealth advisors, and publicists. They give anonymously through their donor-advised fund. They literally stay inside their offices and mansions. I once worked with a foundation executive who refused to visit nonprofits at their offices, insisting they come to him because it was more convenient (for him).

      You might be on the board of directors, though, and guess what? Fear extends there as well. I am constantly amazed at the firewalls that some philanthropies put up around their board members—separating them from staff, from grantees, and even from community. I suppose there are board members who might appreciate that shelter, but if that's the case, I question whether they should serve in the role. Foundation board members should provide a key means of connection with community. Foundations should leverage not just the financial contributions of board members but also their relationships and influence. Board members can make key introductions, act as advocates, give presentations, and make themselves available to community members as representatives of the foundation. Yet too often, they are relegated to the boardroom.

As a funder, it's regrettably easy to stay in a “bubble” of isolation and fear—constrained